Ruth Paine on "The Assassination & Mrs. Paine" film: "Well done, but powerfully awful"

[Joe Bauer]

Another 100 potential patsies like Oswald?

Lee was just a "very strange man?"

And Lee just got incredibly lucky with his totally abandoned upper floor perfect location turkey shoot lair and JFK's limo passing right underneath this and having to make two against security protocol sharp turns there?

How many of those other patsies had one-on-one talks with even peripherally agency connected and George Bush Sr. knowing George De Mohrenschildt, visited embassies in Mexico City, traveled to Russia and lived there and were eventually doing many most public visible, broad daylight in busy downtown, extremely anger inciting political activities in New Orleans which culminated in a police called fight and then being interviewed on TV there?

And had individual FBI agents personally assigned to them. James Hosty ("Assignment Oswald") even before 11,22,1963?

And probably at least one in New Orleans as well?

And how many of those 100 other patsies had a wife and two young children and would think to express after his arrest for two murders his concern that his wife get new shoes for one of his children?

Oswald was no socially dysfunctional, mentally disassociated Bremer, Hinkley, Squeaky Fromme and even Vallee.

And a far, far cry from long time serious crime prison record, totally uneducated, raging racist James Earl Ray. 

 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Steve Roe]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Who says they "knew" he was going to defect?

I would expect the defector, false or otherwise, to keep his or her mouth shut so as to not attract a tremendous amount of undue attention. Oswald did the exact opposite. Do you believe officials at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow were purposefully duped by conspirators back in Washington as to the true nature of Oswald's arrival in Russia?

You can "suspect" it all you want, but the fact remains that Oswald's actions in Russia are thoroughly inconsistent with him being a part of a U.S. intelligence program, as are his well-documented fears that he would face prosecution from the U.S. government once he returned to the country.

Thanks for educated answer Jonathan. That's exactly right. Oswald was worried about being prosecuted for his actions while in Russia. 

[Allen Lowe]

18 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

So everyone connected to LHO automatically had CIA ties? That's a lot of people there lol.

This is the brilliant analysis you choose to share with the world. Ok...

Well how else to determine it? We keep citing Lee Harvey Oswald as being associated with all these CIA types, so we assume he’s a CIA type himself. Ruth Paine associates with him, not just meets him but takes his family in, drives his wife halfway across the country,  helps him get a job and walks him through life in Dallas. Be logical, what does all that mean? And thanks for the compliment.

[Allen Lowe]

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Thanks for educated answer Jonathan. That's exactly right. Oswald was worried about being prosecuted for his actions while in Russia. 

Steve, two words: False Defector Program. 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Allen Lowe

[Allen Lowe]

19 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

"Who we know was a CIA asset as part of a false defector program" ? You have absolutely ZERO hard evidence that this is true. Oswald's behavior in Russia also shows no evidence of him being complicit in such a thing.

I suppose you don’t know about what CIA man Bagley said? He said Oswald, based on the evidence, was a witting asset for the CIA. You may have missed this part of the evidence. The difficulty of debate here is that some of you are really not up to speed on current developments in the case. Not that this is even current, but rather some years old.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Allen Lowe

[Jonathan Cohen]

18 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said:

I suppose you don’t know about what CIA man Bagley said? He said Oswald, based on the evidence, was a witting asset for the CIA. You may have missed this part of the evidence. The difficulty of debate here is that some of you are really not up to speed on current developments in the case. Not that this is even current, but rather some years old.

I'll refrain from dignifying your ignorant comment about whether I'm "up to speed on current developments in the case," because it's clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about. In the absence of any actual evidence for Oswald being a "witting asset" of the CIA, Bagley's statement is nothing more than one person's opinion.

[John Cotter]

14 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

John Cotter writes:

Pat's scenario makes a lot of sense. The simplest solution is usually the most credible solution.

Here, the simplest solution is that the conspirators made use of the fact that a suitable patsy already happened to be working in a building on the motorcade route.

There's no need to assume the extra complication that Oswald's "sheep-dipping" - in particular, his creation of a false persona as a Castro sympathiser - was done specifically with the assassination in mind, even though Oswald's apparent pro-Castro sympathies were utilised after the event.

The same goes for Ruth Paine's involvement with the Oswald family, as well as her and Linnie Mae Randle's (and Roy Truly's) role in getting Oswald a job at the book depository.

The simpler the explanation, and the less complex the conspiracy theory, the more likely it is to be correct.

Pat Speer writes:

Any serious plot to kill JFK during a motorcade would not have put all its eggs into one Oswaldian basket. There must have been a Plan B, and no doubt a Plan C, as in the case of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, in which a succession of shooters lined the route.

I understand that Pat and Greg Parker have had their differences, but Pat might be interested to read Greg's suggestions about alternative patsies:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2643-shoe-shopping#40737

If you believe the solution lies in simplicity, you should take your lead from David Von Pein and his fellow lone nut theorists, because their "solution" is the simplest of all.

If you’re not a lone nut theorist, can you please (a) state in your own words what your understanding of my argument is and (b) specify the flaw(s) that you see in that argument.

Edited November 8, 2022 by John Cotter

[Allen Lowe]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I'll refrain from dignifying your ignorant comment about whether I'm "up to speed on current developments in the case," because it's clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about. In the absence of any actual evidence for Oswald being a "witting asset" of the CIA, Bagley's statement is nothing more than one person's opinion.

Yes nothing more than one person‘s opinion, a person who was in the CIA, recognized all the signs, who understood the routing system, and was reluctant to make that declaration. But of course you know better than him.

The fact that you don’t know all that tells me a lot.

Edited November 8, 2022 by Allen Lowe

[John Cotter]

16 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Oh, yes. You bet I deny it. None of that so-called "sheep-dipping" ever occurred. And I think 99% of all other Lone Assassin believers would join me in denying such nonsense too.

Indeed. The large animal with two ivory tusks and a long snake-like trunk standing at the end of a trail of elephant droppings is a goat.

[James DiEugenio]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I'll refrain from dignifying your ignorant comment about whether I'm "up to speed on current developments in the case," because it's clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about. In the absence of any actual evidence for Oswald being a "witting asset" of the CIA, Bagley's statement is nothing more than one person's opinion.

That is utter baloney Jonathan.

Pete Bagley was one of the CIA's foremost counter intel officers.  And this was not based simply on his opinion.  It was based on the routing of the Agency files concerning Oswald.  Now if you do not know anything about this matter then you should not be talking about it.  If you do know and are still saying its a matter of opinion then you are being a wise guy.

When Betsy Wolf was doing her work on examining Oswald's file she first got and read every division's charter.  She then did an imaginary mapping of where Oswald's files should have gone.  When she actually got the file she discovered that it did not abide by her graph.  Not even close.  In fact, the file went exclusively to where it should not have gone, the Office of Security. This puzzled the HSCA analyst.  So she started calling in former and present officers of the CIA to help explain this.  Because another problem with this weird routing was that there was no 201 file opened by OS.  When, if the files had gone to where they should have, SR, there would have been.

Wolf had stumbled upon why there was no 201 file opened.  But she wanted to know why the files were diverted. So she started her interview process of former and present CIA officers.  Slowly but surely she found out what happened. But the full answer did not emerge until November of 1978 from the present Chief of  Security Richard Gambino. He told Wolf that it does not matter how many documents there are, or if they are pre stamped. If the client had advised the Office of Mail Logistics in advance, the papers would only go to that client and no one else.  So someone had rigged Oswald's files in advance while he was defecting to Russia.

This is what Malcolm showed Bagley.  What it took Betsy months to discover, Bagley understood at a glance. I don't see how it gets much better than that.

[Jonathan Cohen]

17 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Pete Bagley was one of the CIA's foremost counter intel officers.  And this was not based simply on his opinion.  It was based on the routing of the Agency files concerning Oswald.

Jim, I'm not disputing any of Betsy Wolf's research. In fact, I applaud her for going to such great lengths to try to uncover what was really going on with Oswald's files. However, just because the paper trail seems to indicate Oswald had a working relationship with the CIA does not mean he actually did. Further, his actions once in Russia are completely inconsistent with his being an agent of the U.S. government, witting or otherwise.

[Sandy Larsen]

52 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is utter baloney Jonathan.

Pete Bagley was one of the CIA's foremost counter intel officers.  And this was not based simply on his opinion.  It was based on the routing of the Agency files concerning Oswald.  Now if you do not know anything about this matter then you should not be talking about it.  If you do know and are still saying its a matter of opinion then you are being a wise guy.

When Betsy Wolf was doing her work on examining Oswald's file she first got and read every division's charter.  She then did an imaginary mapping of where Oswald's files should have gone.  When she actually got the file she discovered that it did not abide by her graph.  Not even close.  In fact, the file went exclusively to where it should not have gone, the Office of Security. This puzzled the HSCA analyst.  So she started calling in former and present officers of the CIA to help explain this.  Because another problem with this weird routing was that there was no 201 file opened by OS.  When, if the files had gone to where they should have, SR, there would have been.

Wolf had stumbled upon why there was no 201 file opened.  But she wanted to know why the files were diverted. So she started her interview process of former and present CIA officers.  Slowly but surely she found out what happened. But the full answer did not emerge until November of 1978 from the present Chief of  Security Richard Gambino. He told Wolf that it does not matter how many documents there are, or if they are pre stamped. If the client had advised the Office of Mail Logistics in advance, the papers would only go to that client and no one else.  So someone had rigged Oswald's files in advance while he was defecting to Russia.

This is what Malcolm showed Bagley.  What it took Betsy months to discover, Bagley understood at a glance. I don't see how it gets much better than that.

 

It's nice to have an expert posting here.

Thanks for explaining that, Jim. I didn't know the history.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

44 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Further, [Oswald's] actions once in Russia are completely inconsistent with his being an agent of the U.S. government, witting or otherwise.

 

Gee Jonathan... don't you think that if Oswald did any spook type stuff in Russia, he would have kept it secret?

 

[Tom Gram]

10 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Jim, I'm not disputing any of Betsy Wolf's research. In fact, I applaud her for going to such great lengths to try to uncover what was really going on with Oswald's files. However, just because the paper trail seems to indicate Oswald had a working relationship with the CIA does not mean he actually did. Further, his actions once in Russia are completely inconsistent with his being an agent of the U.S. government, witting or otherwise.

So you believe that the paper trail i.e. evidence does indicate that Oswald had a working relationship with the CIA, but think that his actions are inconsistent with him being a false defector? What actions exactly do you think would be consistent with him being a false defector - and what evidence are you basing that on? 

If Oswald was an asset, his behavior would have to appear completely genuine to hold up under the microscopic scrutiny of the KGB.

And what’s your alternate explanation for the paper trail that indicates that Oswald had a working relationship with the CIA? Why should we take your word for it over Pete Bagley’s? Oswald’s files were handled differently than every other defector, and disseminated in a way that had to have been arranged in advance. Why do you think that happened? 

I’m reading a lot of condescension and not really any support for your position. Oswald’s travel into Russia is a complete mess that we are still missing evidence on, and the Betsy Wolf stuff very, very strongly suggests that Oswald’s defection was pre-arranged by the CIA. And that’s not even getting into the Snyder charade, Oswald’s alleged non-debrief, etc. 

Is it possible that Oswald’s defection was genuine? Sure, but the evidence is ambiguous enough that the alternative has at least an equal probability of being true, and that’s being generous. We’re talking about spy games from over 60 years ago here - it’s a miracle we have as much as we do on this. I’m not sure what else you’d expect to find. 

[James DiEugenio]

To all:

The KGB had Oswald smoked out from the moment he stopped into the Metropole Hotel with its infra red cameras and sound devices. Which is why they put him there.

Oswald was so poor at impersonating a genuine defector that he could not get past stage one. He screwed up  the year when the Rosenberg case was being tried and also when they were executed. Impossible for a genuine communist. (Destiny Betrayed, p. 145). Because of this, they decided he was a fake--which he was-- and shipped him out to Minsk.

There, realizing he was a CIA agent, they put a ring of human intelligence about him, and they put electronic  wiring in his nice apartment, later discovered by Oswald and TItovets. (ibid) But still Oswald tried, he  wrote up a very nice summary of how his radio factory worked.

So if Jonathan does not think Oswald was a fake defector, the KGB sure as heck did.

PS One might ask how did Oswald know to go to Helsinki for the fastest processed visa into Russia?